This regional model report is organized as described in Sections 8.2.1 through 8.4.1. Refer to these sections of the report for explanations of the tables, variables, and statistics.

8.26.1 Environmental
Context

St. Louis Moraines and Tamarack
Lowlands are subsections of the North Minnesota Drift and Lake Plains Section
of the Laurentian Mixed Forest Province (Figure
8.1) (Minnesota DNR 1998). These two subsections were combined for modeling
to provide a larger number of sites for analysis.

8.26.1.1 Saint Louis Moraines

Saint Louis Moraines is characterized
by moraines left by the Saint Louis and Koochiching Sublobes (Figure
8.26.2.a). The northeastern quarter of the subsection, in Itasca County,
also contains a large deposit of outwash.

The northern boundary is based on
the southern extent of Glacial Lake Agassiz. The northern half of the western
boundary is the interface between the end moraine of the Des Moines Lobe on
the east side of the subsection boundary and Des Moines Lobe ground moraines
and outwash deposits on the west. The south half of the west boundary is based
on the interface between the end and ground moraines of the Rainy Lobe and the
western limits of the ice contact sediments of the Des Moines Lobe. The southern
portion of the eastern boundary follows the interface between the end and ground
moraines of the St. Louis Sublobe to the west and peat deposits to the east.
The northwest boundary is based on the interface between the end moraine to
the east and the ground moraines or outwash deposits of the Des Moines Lobe
as interpreted by Hobbs and Goebel (1982).

The topography varies from rolling
to steep throughout the subsection. Many lakes are interspersed throughout the
hills (Figure 8.26.1.a). The Mississippi
River is a major river system in the southern part of the region and provides
drainage to the south, while the Big Fork River, in the northern part of the
subsection, drains to the north. Soils are mostly well-drained (Figure
8.26.2.b).

Aspen-birch forest, with a conifer
component, was the prevalent historic vegetation (Figure
8.26.1.b) in the north and south central portions of this subsection. White
and red pine covered much of the north central portion, as well as the extreme
east and west central parts. Stands of Big Woods were present in the central
and east central portion of the subsection. Mixed pine and hardwoods were found
on moraines, typically near lakes and were predominant in the southern tip of
the subsection. Conifer bogs were scattered throughout the subsection, though
they were less prominent than in the subsections to the east and west.

8.26.1.2 Tamarack Lowlands

The borders of the Tamarack Lowlands
coincide with the landform boundaries of Glacial Lake Upham and the Aurora Till
Plain (NOT, 1998). The south edge of the Nashwauk Moraine forms the central
portion of the western boundary (Figure 8.26.2.a).
The southern portion of the western boundary corresponds to the interface between
end and ground moraines of the St. Louis sublobe on the west, and peat areas
of the Aitkin Lacustrine Plain on the east. The southern border of the Rainy
Lobe sediments, including iron ore deposits (now mines), forms the northern
boundary. The northern half of the eastern border is based on the interface
between the St. Croix ground moraine on the east and the St. Louis Sublobe ground
and end moraines on the west. The western portion of the southern border is
defined by the Aitkin Lacustrine Plain to the north and the Swatara plain to
the south (Dan Hanson, personal communication 1997).

The land is level to gently rolling.
Peat soils (Figure 8.26.2.b) are deposited
over much of the subsection, with glacial lacustrine sediments underlying these
deposits. The Toimi drumlin field (Wright 1974) occupies the northeastern portion
of the subsection. Despite the level topography of this subsection, a continental
divide sends two major rivers in separate directions. The Mississippi River
flows south while the Saint Louis River flows east to Lake Superior. There are
relatively few lakes in this subsection (Figure
8.26.1.a). The only large lake is Big Sandy, which is actually a reservoir
on the Savanna River in northern Aitkin County. Along the northern edge of the
subsection are several large iron ore mines.

In the 19th century conifer
bogs dominated the Tamarack Lowlands (Figure
8.26.1.b). Some open muskeg was found in the center of the subsection. Aspen-birch
forest (with a coniferous component) was located in narrow corridors on the
uplands between the bogs. White and red pine were located in extensive regions
along the northern border and to a lesser degree in the east and south central
areas. Jack pine forest was recorded in the northeastern portion of the subsection.
In the southwest, conifer bog was mixed with marshes and scattered hardwoods.
Big Woods were found east of the Mississippi River in the northwest. River bottom
forest was present along the Mississippi, lower Willow, upper Saint Louis, and
Whiteface rivers.

The St. Louis Moraines and Tamarack
Lowlands subsections were combined for modeling to increase the number of known
archaeological sites in the database. St. Louis Moraines contained 112 known
sites, while Tamarack Lowlands contained 74. Combined, this provided only about
half the average number of sites compared to the other modeled regions.

8.26.2.1.1 St. Louis Moraines

Zones of high site potential are
located primarily along lakeshores in the St. Louis Moraines subsection from
Pokegama Lake in the narrow central portion of the subsection to Turtle Lake
in the northwest (Figure 8.26.3). An area of high site potential
extends north from Pokegema Lake to Rice, Long, Loon, and Jay Gould lakes, and
along the Mississippi River. A thin strip of medium and high potential in central
Itasca County follows the Prairie River northward to Prairie and Shoal lakes.
The higher elevation landscape between Shoal Lake and the Mississippi River
corresponds to areas of low site potential.

Large areas of high and medium site
potential occur around lakes in the northern half of the subsection, for example
around Deer, Moose, Little Moose, Fawn, and Cottonwood lakes. The extent of
high and medium site potential here is greater than around other lakes. A zone
of high site potential is found in a narrower band around Trout, Bluewater,
and Wabana lakes in central Itasca County. In the far north of the subsection,
the area of high and medium site potential around Deer, Pickerel, and Battle
lakes extends away from the lakeshores.

South and east of Pokegama Lake,
in southeastern Itasca County, areas of high or medium site potential are very
sparse. One notable cluster is at the southern tip of the subsection where areas
of high site potential follow the Mississippi River, the lower Pine River, and
a number of lakes north of those rivers in northwestern Crow Wing County. Contiguous
zones of medium site potential connect the high site potential around Adney,
Gaggle, and Perry lakes to the east and surround Island, Roger, and Upper Dean
lakes.

8.26.2.1.2 Tamarack Lowlands

There is one large area of high
and medium site potential in the Tamarack Lowlands subsection. It surrounds
Aitkin, Big Sandy, Rat, Flowage, Round lakes, and Lake Minnewawa in the southern
part of the subsection in northeastern Aitkin County. Areas of high and medium
site potential in this subsection, though few and far between, correspond to
lakeshores and stream courses. In the northeast portion of the subsection,
in central St. Louis County, a small cluster of high and medium site potential
is found south of the town of Biwabik around Embarrass, Cedar Island, and Esquagama
lakes. Southeast of this area Bass Lake, Lost Lake, Loon Lake, and the adjacent
stretch of the Saint Louis River contain limited zones of high and medium site
potential. South of the town of Virginia, Ely, Saint Mary’s, and Pleasant lakes
contain areas of medium site potential along the lake shorelines, a second tier
of high site potential, and a final tier of medium site potential.

8.26.2.2 Evaluation

The site probability model performed
extremely well. It is based on 11 variables (Table 8.26.1)
representing topography, soils and hydrology.

In this model, 87.64 percent of
all known sites are in high/medium site potential areas, which make up only
9.76 percent of landscape (Table 8.26.2). This produces
a very strong gain statistic of 0.88864 (Table
8.6.11). The model tested less well, predicting only 66.67 percent of test
sites. The test gain statistic was 0.85361.

The database included 186 sites
that were not single artifacts (Table 8.26.2). Two preliminary
models for this region, using different halves of the known sites, had 90.89
percent agreement. This is a very high level of agreement. However, the Kappa
statistic, which is adjusted for the amount of agreement expected by chance
alone, for the model was 0.50751, which is close to average for the state (Table
8.6.11). The conditional Kappa statistics (Table 8.26.3)
are lowest for the medium and high site potential zones, indicating instability
in distinguishing between these two zones. Increasing the number of sites for
modeling may improve confidence in the model and model stability.

When the site probability model
is applied to the St. Louis Moraines subsection, 88.39 percent of all sites,
excluding single artifacts, are in the high and medium site potential areas,
which constitute 18.72 percent of landscape (Table 8.26.4).
This produces a strong overall gain statistic of 0.78821.

There was 83 percent agreement for
this model within the St. Louis Moraines subsection. The Kappa statistic for
the model, which is adjusted for the amount of agreement expected by chance
alone, applied to this subsection, was 0.49479. The conditional Kappa statistics
(Table 8.26.5) are lowest for the medium and high site
potential zones.

When the site probability model
is applied to the Tamarack Lowlands subsection, 82.48 percent of all sites,
excluding single artifacts, are in the high and medium site potential areas,
which constitute 4.77 percent of landscape (Table 8.26.6).
This produces a very strong overall gain statistic of 0.94484. This is an exceptionally
high level of site probability model performance.

Agreement of the preliminary models
for Tamarack Lowlands was 95 percent. The same level of agreement was observed
for preliminary models developed for this individual subsection. The Kappa statistic
for the model, which is adjusted for the amount of agreement expected by chance
alone, applied to this subsection, was 0.46132, which is below average. The
conditional Kappa statistics (Table 8.26.7) are lowest
for the medium and high site potential zones.

The Mann-Whitney U tests (Table
8.26.8) indicate that all differences in variables between modeled sites
and random points are significant at the 0.05 level. This means that the distribution
in values between sites and random points is different enough for them to be
considered originating from different populations.

Table 8.26.8.
Model Variable Statistics.

St.
Louis Moraines/ Tamarack Lowlands

Modeled
Sites

Surveyed
Areas

Modeled
Sites

Sites
in Low Prob.

Neg.
Survey Points

Random
Points

Model
Variable

Coeff.

Sign.

Coeff.

Sign.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Mean

S.D.

Distance
to nearest major ridge or divide

-

-

0.29

0.476

71.94

33.15

70.81

26.76

77.27

32.31

76.01

34.91

Distance
to nearest minor ridge or divide

-

-

0.089

0.959

28.26

13.5

20.96

11.35

23.43

11.5

24.54

11.6

Elevation

-0.396

0

-0.501

0

1287.67

63.48

1322.91

81.03

1270.47

54.06

1318.6

69.13

Height
above surroundings

-0.142

0

0.037

0

9.4

10.35

8.68

7.24

5.44

8.3

4.79

7.65

Size
of minor watershed

0.092

0

-

-

8090

2588.44

7172.33

2433.16

7080.14

2166.22

7084.2

2001.1

Size
of major watershed

-

-

-0.014

0

2163.37

261.43

2045.31

426.93

2263.19

117.99

2185.1

288.91

Direction
to nearest water or wetland (sine)

-0.014

0

0.126

0

0.24

0.75

0.41

0.78

0.39

0.7

0.47

0.71

Distance
to edge of nearest large lake

-0.814

0

-

-

11.21

16.94

46.67

16.92

41.86

37.59

57.94

29.39

Distance
to edge of nearest perennial river or stream

-

-

0.248

0

34.32

15.28

21.95

19.01

38

17.37

33.88

16.84

Distance
to edge of nearest swamp

0.538

0

-

-

13.59

7.45

9.06

6.53

9.98

7.63

8.83

7.29

Distance
to nearest confluence between perennial or

intermittent
streams and large rivers

-

-

-0.15

0

69.27

24.61

62.43

36.14

64.43

25.38

78.84

28.16

Distance
to nearest lake, wetland, organic soil, or stream

-0.576

0

-0.468

0

3.5

4.83

5.33

5.62

7.53

10.53

10.62

9.97

Distance
to nearest permanent wetland inlet/outlet

0.295

0.002

-

-

138.58

34.27

132.77

36.78

154.27

27.88

148.01

38.39

Size
of nearest permanent lake

-

-

0.658

0

2896.79

2117.84

247.28

244.71

1477.41

2092.52

458.37

807.51

Distance
to aspen-birch

-

-

0.041

0

21.32

18.6

23.57

16.26

31.31

22.62

22.7

20.3

Distance
to Big Woods

-

-

-0.087

0

75.74

45.95

93.35

60.02

72.62

34.11

92.94

58.51

Distance
to hardwoods

-

-

-0.06

0

59.93

30.5

67.67

42.27

52.21

27.6

61.07

33.82

Distance
to pine barrens or flats

-0.374

0

-0.603

0

73.51

36.12

83.71

38.92

80.3

47.14

111.27

43.34

Distance
to prairie

-0.237

0.003

-0.403

0

320.38

48.74

333.09

63.17

313.72

38.09

330.33

57.95

Distance
to river bottom forest

-

-

-0.294

0

92.19

34.39

93.98

48.01

68.84

34.89

97.45

41.75

Vegetation
diversity within 1 km

-

-

0.293

0

3.27

0.98

3.32

0.99

2.92

1.19

2.53

0.93

Distance
to edge of nearest area of organic soils

-

-

0.152

0

49.37

22.13

37.72

24.73

36

18.86

33.7

20.38

Distance
to glacial lake sediment

-0.144

0

0.168

0.129

84.69

44.03

76.97

57.51

47.12

38.64

55.24

49.06

Frequency
counts

186

870

186

22

671

3066

See Interpretation section for discussion of the statistics:Coeff. = correlation coefficient

Sign. = significance of the Mann-Whitney U test

S.D. = standard deviation

Distances and areas are expressed in square roots of meters. Square the values
in the table to get actual values.

8.26.2.3.2 Relationships between
Variable Pairs

The correlation matrix indicates
that there is a moderate amount of redundancy between the site model variables (Table 8.26.9). There are eight variable pairs, involving
seven variables, with coefficients greater than 0.5. Elevation has a
high positive coefficient with distance to prairie (0.86) and moderate
ones with distance to pine barrens or flats (0.57), distance to glacial
lake sediment (0.53), indicating that these environmental features tend
to be at lower elevations within these subsections.

The negative correlation between
elevation and distance to nearest permanent wetland inlet/outlet (-0.64)
implies that these inlet/outlets are at higher elevations. Permanent wetland
inlet/outlets are in turn negatively associated with distance to pine barrens
or flats (-0.53) and distance to prairie (-0.53), which are likely
to be at lower elevations. Distance to pine barrens or flats positively
correlated with glacial lake sediment (0.57), both low elevation features.
Finally, distance to nearest large lake is positively correlated with distance to nearest lake, wetland, organic soil, or stream (0.68), for
obvious reasons.

Table 8.26.9.
Variable Correlation Matrix.

St. Louis Moraines –

Tamarack Lowlands

Elevation

Height
above surroundings

Size
of minor watershed

Direction
to nearest water or wetland (sine)

Distance
to edge of nearest large lake

Distance
to edge of nearest swamp

Distance
to nearest lake, wetland, organic soil, or stream

Distance
to nearest permanent wetland inlet/outlet

Distance
to pine barrens or flats

Distance
to prairie

Distance
to glacial lake sediment

Elevation

1

Height
above surroundings

0.38

1

Size
of minor watershed

0.27

0.1

1

Direction
to nearest water or wetland (sine)

-0.13

-0.28

-0.02

1

Distance
to edge of nearest large lake

0.19

0.2

-0.09

-0.15

1

Distance
to edge of nearest swamp

-0.25

-0.17

0.14

0.04

-0.29

1

Distance
to nearest lake, wetland, organic soil, or stream

0.26

0.34

0.06

-0.2

0.68

-0.04

1

Distance
to nearest permanent wetland inlet/outlet

-0.64

-0.18

-0.14

0.05

-0.12

0.29

-0.1

1

Distance
to pine barrens or flats

0.57

0.29

0.25

-0.12

0.18

-0.23

0.13

-0.53

1

Distance
to prairie

0.86

0.2

0.3

-0.04

0.07

-0.07

0.14

-0.53

0.47

1

Distance
to glacial lake sediment

0.53

0.05

0.03

-0.02

0.01

-0.18

0.08

-0.4

0.57

0.49

1

Refer
to "Relationships between variable pairs" for interpretation of the
table values.

8.26.2.3.3Sites in Low Probability
Areas

Sites in low potential areas have
mean values near random points on six variables (Table 8.26.8).
There are two variables where these differences are rather clear. Compared to
the mean values of all modeled sites, sites in low potential areas are further
from large lakes (2178 vs. 126 meters) and nearer swamps (82 vs. 185 meters).
Sites in low potential areas are dissimilar to random points for five variables,
including height above surroundings (8.7 vs. 4.8 feet) and distance to lakes,
wetlands, organic soils, or streams (28 vs. 113 meters).

Of the 22 sites
not predicted by the model, 13 are in the St. Louis Moraines and nine are in
the Tamarack Lowlands. Sites not predicted in the St. Louis Moraines include
one wild rice site, two mortuary/cemetery sites, one mound or earthwork, two
artifact scatters, and seven lithic scatters. In the Tamarack Lowlands, they
include one mortuary/cemetery, two mounds or earthworks, one trading post, one
artifact scatter, and four lithic scatters. If all site types were equally well
predicted, 11.83 percent of each type should be found in low probability areas.
Only mounds and earthworks are represented in something close to this proportion.
Artifact scatters are quite under represented, with only three of 91 known artifact
scatters in the low probability area. This indicates that the model is doing
a good job predicting this site type. The other site types appear to be over
represented in low probability areas, but the total numbers of wild rice sites
(4), mortuary/cemetery sites (9), and trading posts (3) are so low that this
may not be significant. However, with 11 (20.37 percent) of 54 lithic scatters
in the low probability areas, it would appear that the model does a relatively
poor job of predicting this type of site.

8.26.2.3.4 Relationships between
Cultural Context, Descriptive, or Settlement Variables and Site Potential

Table 8.26.10 provides a breakdown of the number of sites in the three probability classes
according to three separate variables (aceramic/not aceramic, Archaic/not Archaic,
single component/not single component). Two of the relationships are significant
at the 0.05 level, as measured by the chi-square test. Sites lacking pottery
are relatively more common in the low to medium site potential area (16.9 percent
and 15.5 percent) compared to ceramic-bearing sites (3.6 percent and 7.2 percent)
but less likely to occur in the high site potential areas (67.6 percent vs.
89.2 percent). Sites containing Archaic components are over represented in the
medium site potential class compared to sites lacking these components (33.3
percent vs. 7.1 percent). These Archaic components contribute to the relatively
high frequencies of aceramic sites in the medium site potential areas, although
sites frequently classified as lithic scatters probably account for most of
the difference.

Table 8.26.10. Summary
of Bivariate Relationships between Three Dichotomous Archaeological Variables
and Three Areas of Site Potential, St. Louis Moraines – Tamarack Lowlands (Site
Probability Model).

The survey probability model (Figure
8.26.5) for St. Louis Moraines and Tamarack Lowlands Subsections indicates
that large portions of these subsections have not been adequately surveyed.
The distribution of high and medium survey potential is strongly influenced
by a non-uniform distribution of surveys and only somewhat resembles the site
probability model. The large unsurveyed areas include large peatlands as well
as ground and end moraines (Figure 8.26.2.b).

The overwhelming majority of surveyed
places are located in several clusters and linear corridors and are separated
by extensive areas with low survey frequency. The longest linear survey follows
State Highway 2 in a northwest-southeast orientation for 70 km. It is surrounded
by a corresponding zone of high and medium survey potential.

North central Aitkin County is also
well-surveyed. One survey follows the lakeshores of Big Sandy, Aitkin, Minnewawa
and other smaller lakes. An adjacent 18 km linear survey track follows the Mississippi
River valley between the Moose - Willow Wildlife Area and the town of Palisade.
The corresponding zone of high and medium survey potential encompasses both
surveys in an irregularly shaped polygon approximately 25 km in diameter.

The southern tip of the Tamarack
Lowlands subsection is marked by another linear survey, seven km long, along
the beach ridge of the Lake Upham/Aitkin geomorphologic association. This survey
is associated with an elongated medium potential survey zone that extends further
upstream along the Mississippi River to connect with the much larger zone described
in the previous paragraph. Other surveys within the St. Louis Moraines subsection
are located around Pokegama Lake and near Trout, Wabana and Deer Lakes in south
central Itasca County. The few remaining small zones of high and medium survey
potential that are not associated with survey clusters are in proximity to lakes,
river confluences, and streams.

8.26.3.2 Evaluation

This survey probability model predicted
surveyed places very well, indicating that surveys have not been located randomly
within this region. It is based on 19 variables (Table 8.26.11),
representing topography, vegetation, soils and hydrology.

Distance to nearest confluence
between perennial or intermittent streams and large rivers

-0.010345799

100.0

Distance to nearest lake,
wetland, organic soils, or stream

-0.04697748

100.0

Distance to nearest major
ridge or divide

-0.008897205

100.0

Distance to nearest minor
ridge or divide

-0.01352270

76.5

Distance to pine barrens or
flats

-0.009167215

100.0

Distance to prairie

0.02213017

100.0

Distance to river bottom forest

-0.01804470

100.0

Height above surroundings

0.04365689

100.0

Size of major watershed

0.001208864

99.2

Size of nearest permanent
lake

0.0002299253

100.0

Vegetation diversity within
1 km

0.170693

48.7

The model predicts 82.18 percent
of all surveyed places in high/medium survey potential areas, which make up
24.37 percent of the landscape (Table 8.26.12). This
produces a strong gain statistic of 0.70846 (Table
8.6.14), which indicates a high degree of survey bias. This model was able
to predict surveyed places with less precision than the site probability model
was able to predict sites, indicating that sites are confined to only a portion
of the total area surveyed. The low numbers of both sites (199) and negative
survey points (671) in the large area of this region bear this out. This indicates
a frequency of only 0.077 surveyed places per square km (Table
8.6.14), with a frequency of only 0.01765 known sites per square km. These
numbers are quite low compared to other regions. Only 13 single artifacts are
recorded in the region. However, excluding them from the sample drops the site
frequency only slightly, to 0.0165.

The database included 870 surveyed
places (Table 8.26.12). Two preliminary survey
probability models for the combined subsections had 78.92 percent agreement.
The Kappa statistic for these models was 0.5466 (Table
8.6.14), which is close to average. The conditional Kappa statistics (Table
8.26.13) are lowest for the medium potential zone. It is assumed that increasing
the number of surveyed places for modeling may improve model stability, as will
distributing more surveys throughout the undersurveyed areas.

When the survey probability model
is applied to the St. Louis Moraines subsection, 77.00 percent of all surveyed
places are in the high and medium survey potential areas, which constitute 25.05
percent of landscape (Table 8.26.14). This produces
a good gain statistic of 0.67442. However, its performance is attained at the
expense of predicting fewer than 85 percent of surveyed places. The strong performance
of this model in the Tamarack Lowlands subsection accounts for this. Because
many more surveyed places are recorded in Tamarack Lowlands, the model is weighted
towards that subsection.

The agreement of the preliminary
models within the St. Louis Moraines subsection was 78 percent. The Kappa statistic
for these models was 0.5213. The conditional Kappa statistics (Table
8.26.15) are lowest for the medium potential zone.

When the survey probability model
is applied to the Tamarack Lowlands subsection, 85.06 percent of all surveyed
places are in the high and medium survey potential areas, which constitute 24.00
percent of landscape (Table 8.26.16). This produces
a strong overall gain statistic of 0.71785.

Agreement of the preliminary models
for Tamarack Lowlands was 80 percent. The Kappa statistic for these models was
0.56031. The conditional Kappa statistics (Table 8.26.17)
are lowest for the medium potential zone.

The survey probability model is
constructed from 19 variables, nearly equally divided between topographic, hydrologic,
and vegetation characteristics (Table 8.26.8). Two soils
variables are also included in the model. Seven of the site probability model
variables are included in the survey probability model.

Negative survey points, places that
have been surveyed but no sites were found, have mean values similar to those
of random points on five variables: distance to nearest major ridge or divide (Figure 8.26.7a), distance to nearest
minor ridge or divide (Figure 8.26.7b), height above surroundings (Figure 8.26.7d), distance to edge of nearest area of organic soils (Figure 8.26.12b), and distance to glacial
lake sediment (Figure 8.26.12c). However, they are similar
to sites with respect to distance to Big Woods (Figure 8.26.10d). With respect to direction
to nearest water or wetland (sine) (Figure 8.26.8c), distance to nearest confluence
between perennial or intermittent streams and large rivers (Figure 8.26.9c), and vegetation diversity
within 1 km (Figures 8.26.4.b and 8.26.12a), negative survey points are intermediate
between sites and random points.

The Mann-Whitney U tests indicate
that the distribution in values for surveyed places, compared to random points,
are different enough (at the 0.05 level of significance) on all except three
variables to consider them as originating from separate populations (Table
8.26.8). As a whole, the surveys conducted in this subsection are non-random
in relation to the variables included in the model.

The survey implementation model
for the St. Louis Moraines and Tamarack Lowlands subsections indicates that
70.37 percent of the land area is categorized as unknown because of inadequate
survey (Figure 8.26.6 and Table
8.26.18). This is much higher than the statewide average, but is typical
for the northern part of the state. Eight (24.24 percent) of the test sites
were found in the unknown area.

Zones of suspected high and possibly
high site probability are common around lakes. This indicates that, even though
similar environments have not been well surveyed, they are similar to other
areas where sites have been found. Low and possibly low probability areas occupy
only 17.44 percent of the landscape. These are typically found in the vicinity
of the survey clusters described in Section 8.26.3.1.

River valley floors and terraces,
lake margins, and peat deposits in the St. Louis Moraines and Tamarack Lowlands
have the potential to contain deeply buried archaeological sites. The Mn/Model
landscape suitability model for the Mississippi River valley cuts through the
southwestern third of these combined subsections (Section
12.4). This model should be consulted for information regarding the geomorphic
potential for both surface and subsurface archaeological sites.